Skip to comments.
BUSH COMPROMISES ON TAX CUT
The Washington Times ^
| April 16, 2003
| By Bill Sammon
Posted on 04/20/2003 3:42:00 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:40:15 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
To: Uncle Bill
(sigh) Must we return to Compassionate Conservatism so soon?
To: Uncle Bill
Gees people, its better than getting no tax cut, don't blame bush, blame the senate republicans
3
posted on
04/20/2003 3:46:18 PM PDT
by
Norse
To: Norse
If you do just a little searching above you'll realize, you're not going to get a tax cut.
To: Norse
Mr. Bush is unlikely to get much help from Democrats...Add and Snowe and Voinovitch, and don't forget the undermining by Grassley.
To: Uncle Bill
1) Half a loaf is better than no loaf.
2) W risks the fate of his Dad and the Nation. Why not the whole loaf??
3). Coward!!! You didn't call for the repeal of the Income Tax (which is a tax on production, and therefore a cause of poverty) and so played into the Nazis' (excuse me, Democrats') hands. Oh Hell, take what little you can get.
Remember, a House-Senate Reconciliation bill cannot be filibustered. So let the House Majority write just as much as is possible into such a bill.
6
posted on
04/20/2003 3:53:39 PM PDT
by
Chairman Fred
(@mousiedung.commie)
To: Uncle Bill
How about just eliminating the entire federal income tax code, abolishing the IRS, and instituting a national retail sales tax.
That would be the economic boom of all booms.
To: Uncle Bill
Who could get a tax cut for the masses? Any suggestions?
8
posted on
04/20/2003 3:55:25 PM PDT
by
deport
To: deport
Who could get a tax cut for the masses? Any suggestions? Fascinating question. Would you ping me if you get an answer to that?
To: LurkerNoMore!
Okay..... just curious as to who we should be supporting for 2004. It's time to get the campaign up and running....
10
posted on
04/20/2003 4:03:01 PM PDT
by
deport
To: deport
"Okay..... just curious as to who we should be supporting for 2004. It's time to get the campaign up and running...."
We should be supporting the President who is trying his best to get this done for us and dump those who are stopping him!!
11
posted on
04/20/2003 4:21:34 PM PDT
by
LADY J
To: Uncle Bill
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, to learn that Bush is going soft.
He's racking up a clear record as a "moderate," not a "compassionate conservative," to use his own weasel words. Goldwater wouldn't be happy with that "compassionate" prefix, because it suggests conservatives aren't--something the liberals love to say. Goldwater's book, _The Conscience of a Conservative_ addresses that very point, except in Goldwater's day they called themselves "progressive conservatives." LOL!
Bush is also going to keep the assault weapons ban, lots of bad news this week. Ah well, like father, like son. All in the family: the Order of the Skull and Bones family.
Shocked! Who would have thunk!
12
posted on
04/20/2003 4:22:06 PM PDT
by
Hoppean
To: deport
Okay..... just curious as to who we should be supporting for 2004. It's time to get the campaign up and running....We could always draft Tom Tancredo. Lots of people want to get our borders under control, something Jorge Bush couldn't bring himself to do since he's buddy-buddy with El Presidente Vicente Fox.
13
posted on
04/20/2003 4:23:34 PM PDT
by
Hoppean
To: Texas Eagle
This is the true art of negotiation. Reagan used it to perfection and it seems as if Bush is taking a page from his book. It is better to get something rather that nothing. Tomorrow will be another day and the new baseline will be drawn. Incrementlism is in the Liberals playbook and has worked for them for generations, why not for the Conservatives too? Patience!Patience! Patience!
To: Uncle Bill
Well, of course! I mean, how can we have tax cuts when the budget is growing? /bitter sarcasm>
To: Uncle Bill
Yah, that ol' Bush is just so liberal. We are now arguing how big to make the tax cuts.
I'm sure that would happen under a Democrat. Any Democrat. Uh huh. And Baghdad Bob picks the horses at Churchill Downs.
(Oh, and that ol' liberal Bush used exec. orders to END more abortions than Reagan ever did. Yep, a flaming liberal).
16
posted on
04/20/2003 4:53:19 PM PDT
by
LS
To: Hoppean
A FLAMING liberal! That's it! Bush must be a FLAIMING liberal. Gosh, a TAX CUT (there's a liberal position). A friend of the court brief in Emerson. Pro-life ex. orders that have ended more abortions than Reagan ever dreamed of.
You Bush haters need to get a life. Go vote for Ron Paul and be irrelevant.
17
posted on
04/20/2003 4:55:16 PM PDT
by
LS
To: LS
I don't think Bush is a flaming libera, but I do know how to save us some 10 billion dollars: stop sending aid to Africa and get us out of the UN... and he won't do either.
18
posted on
04/20/2003 5:05:51 PM PDT
by
Anamensis
(New axis of evil: Syria, Iran, Hollywood)
To: LS
"Yah, that ol' Bush is just so liberal. We are now arguing how big to make the tax cuts."No you're not. You're arguing that when Bush stole $10 in taxes from us due to outrageous socialist spending to $1 in tax cuts, we're suppose to jump up and down with glee and feel good about being screwed. Forget it. He's all yours.
That Yes Man In The White House
The presidential veto is like a nuclear weapon: no one will be afraid of it unless he thinks it might actually be used. Ronald Reagan, who used to invite Congress to "make my day" by passing bills he didn't like, killed nearly 70 of them. The first President Bush, battling a Democratic Congress, racked up 44 vetoes, only one of them overridden.
But conservatives on Capitol Hill are becoming frustrated by President George W. Bush's reluctance to follow in Dad's footsteps. After nearly 16 months in office, Bush has not exercised a single veto.
To: LADY J
and dump those who are stopping him!!
Yep that would be a great start..... clean out both sides of the aisle....
20
posted on
04/20/2003 5:07:49 PM PDT
by
deport
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-77 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson